i.e. if there are many of the same tuplets in a row, the tuplet number is shown only for a couple of them, and then it is omitted and sort of "implied".
I sometimes typeset music on a computer, and of course it's no problem for the computer to put the tuplet numbers everywhere automatically. Up to now, I've been doing just that, but I'm wondering whether it's a good idea, given that so many outstanding engravers of the past did it differently.
Personally, I like the numbers being explicit, but as a hobbyist and not a sight-reader, I would like to know:
Why was this practice adopted? "Laziness"? (I can imagine they had better things to do than hammering out tons of "3"s and "6"s.) Or is it clutter reduction that makes the score easier to read for the majority of people?
Would it be good to adopt it in one's own computer typesetting today, too? (That will sort of follow from the first one, though.)
I want to make my scores as readable as possible, and this has been bugging me for quite a long time.